You can find the teams listed here: https://www.uci.org/track/teams

For example, Great Britain is fielding 4 teams which include 19 riders for the 2019-2020 season:

- HUUB WATTBIKE TEST TEAM
- TEAM BREEZE
- TEAM INSPIRED
- TEAM WALES

This isn't counting those who will be riding for the British National Team.

The points for all of the above will go to Team GB when it's time to figure out how many rider slots (that can be assigned to anyone) a team gets for the European Championships, World Championships, and Olympics. This is how Team GB might have 3 riders in a Keirin Final. See how that can affect the outcome?

If it's a numbers game, the more people you have out there collecting points, the more you get and the fewer available for your competition.

So, let's say the British have 19 people out there scooping up points but can only put 10 on their National Team. Guess what? Those points that the other 9 riders collected don't get redistributed to the other teams. They are just lost in the system. So, the points that the 1st 10 got are now even more valuable!


2019-2020 Track Trade Team Count:
Canada: 2
USA: 0
Australia: 1
Germany: 2
Japan: 4
New Zealand: 2
People's Republic of China: 7
France: 0
Netherlands: 1


EDIT:

Updated the verbiage in a paragraph above from "who gets to go" to "rider slots".

It seems obvious to me that the points/qualification structure is what needs changing, not the presence of trade teams.

Related: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/huub...track-reforms/

Also FWIW I don't think this would be a bad thing.

It is if you are trying to develop track cycling in countries other than France, GB, Australia, Netherlands, and NZ. Many, if not all Olympic/National federations base athlete funding on podium finishes at major events. If you;re the UCI and you're trying to broaden the track cycling market (China about 15 years ago, HK, Malaysia, Korea...) then you have to figure out a system that incentivizes them to participate, otherwise it just becomes the "Same Old Boys Club", and the less competitive nations won't support the sport.

Well, using that idea of only letting the best athletes contest the Games:

- The Olympic baseball tournament will be comprised only of several Cuban, US, S. Korean, and Japanese teams (multiple teams each country)
- The Olympic basketball tournaments will be only multiple US teams.
- Gymnastics would only be US and RUS athletes.
- Table Tennis tournament would only be several Chinese athletes.

:D

Why don’t they just not give points to trade teams?

Let's see how that would look at the local level.

Imagine if a high school basketball team had a bench so deep (meaning that even the backup players who don't play are very good) that they can field an entirely separate team...and compete in the local HS division. Lake View High Team A and Lake View High Team B.

Teams would get their butts kicked by Lakeview High coming and going and Lake View High School would get +1 or +2 wins every week where schools with only 1 team only get a max of +1 every week...if they win. The players keep the points that they score and the the teams with the most total points get invited to the State Championships.

Further, what if Lake View A & B could beat up on teams in the local division and then use their combined points total to earn easy access to the State Championship tournament! And then the coach transfers the best players from teams A & B to that one Lake View team with hella points to easily qualify for the biggest tournament of the year.

That would be ridiculous, right? :D


That's kinda how the Trade Team Athlete's points --> National Team points system works.

I would imagine that would create a situation where the Trade Team owns the points instead of the Athlete.

What would the Trade Team use them for? All of the big events are for Nations, not teams: PanAm Championships, Oceanic Championships, European Championships, Asian Games, World Championships, Olympic Games.

I don't think they would let a professional Trade Team compete against National Teams in those events. That would be like the Atlanta Braves playing in the Olympic Baseball Tournament.

No, you misunderstand, just give the qualifying points to the national teams, the trade teams don't get any points at all, they just compete to win the event they are competing in.

Oh. Yeah, I misread what you wrote.

I don't think they give points to the trade teams. The points are attached to the Athlete. And by being assigned to the National Team roster, the National Team gets the points.

(If I understand correctly).

So, you are suggesting to give the points to the National Team based on Nationality even if that athlete is never selected to the National Team?

I can create a UCI Trade Team for the next season and assign myself as an Athlete. If I enter USA Elite Track Nationals and get 1 point for participating, are you saying that Team USA should get that point even if I am never assigned to the National Team?

The point I’m really making is that if the issue is the points system then re-design that, you don’t necessarily have to destroy the trade teams to achieve that.

That's fair.

This argument makes sense to me.

I also see the argument from the trade teams side, which also makes sense.

I think Carleton's examples highlight a bit of the issue. Unlike other sports, like the NBA or NHL, track cycling does not have national or international leagues in which trade teams can compete. For basketball, soccer (futbol), ice hockey, and road cycling, there are several professional leagues that employ athletes from around the world, who then come together on the national teams to compete in the World Cup or Olympics. Track cycling lacks that space, which is where a trade team really fits.

Could argue that this would make for better, more entertaining competition. Is Olympic basketball fun to watch?

And even so, while I get the importance of maintaining the competition of national teams format at the Olympic games, I don't see any reason why outside events should have to conform to the same format. These changes seem to turn the World Cup into a mini-Olympics, making them in many ways less interesting/exciting, and in a sport that already sees a dearth of good events to watch, I only see this making that problem worse.

(I edited my analogy above so that it's more in line with how the Trade Team system works. Basically, the HS students keep their points and qualify for State by forming a team of players who scored the most points that season.)

I think that's part of the problem...the fact that the World Cups serve 2 purposes:
- Qualifying for the World Championships (and moving the events around the globe to allow more access to qualifying events).
- Serve as a qualifying events for the Olympics.

The UCI was charged with developing the criteria for the Olympic Cycling events. I guess the single system doesn't serve both goals equally well.

Yes, Olympic basketball is boring. But, that's why we have the NBA, to see the best play the game.

I think if you think of Olympic sports as the ultimate extension of all amateur sports (high school, college, AAU, etc...), then it makes sense.

...a little.

What track cycling needs is a WC series and a "ProTour"series.

WCs being national only, where trade team riders can compete for their national team, and points earned are kept by the National Fed. 4 plus the World Championship events run every second month, from Sept-Apr/May, so as not to compete with the road season. It's not a schedule that's too overbearing for smaller nations, so you get more global representation.

ProTour, like the road series, is a commercialized series, basically an extension of the Six Day circuit/Revolution/Wheelraces/..., but qualifying points are not awarded. It's strictly a separate series where any rider can compete, under any banner, National or Trade. It doesn't need to have/follow a standard program, but recognizes winners/placings, and allows riders to build on those results. Race organizers can apply for ProTour status by meeting a prize purse threshold. Rider fields can be determined via invitation/application by/to organizer, or through local qualifying events, be they UCI events or otherwise.

Have a cumulative leader's competition in each series, exactly as the white WC jersey, with white jersey winners recieving a prize at the end of each series. Cash for the ProTour, and extra qualifying points for the WC series, sort of like double points in a final points race sprint.

Yes it creates parallels/duplication, but it gives the sport a chance to grow/globalize, reach new markets, while also giving the opportunity for the best to race each other in deeper/tighter/closer fields, without each series influencing the other. And yes, riders are already doing events for cash outside the UCI series, but at least not you can bring some organization and continuity to the season, by making each event count for something more than just the event by itself.

You can sign BEAT's open letter to the UCI protesting these proposals here:
https://www.beatcyclingclub.com/blog..._SSDfsYBqRK6t0

I haven't seen these posted in here yet:

Any press is good press?
https://www.velonews.com/2019/07/com...ckwards_495513

2019 Junior and elite track national results here:
Event Schedule

Interesting thing on grass velodromes, which I admit I hadn't heard about until just now.

https://www.velonews.com/2019/07/new...lodrome_497324

Dolan even make a "grass track" pre-cursa. Not sure what the difference is (other than it likely comes with different tires)

Yeah, interesting. Looks like the default is 30c tires, and 165mm cranks (even shorter than usual to deal with no banking I assume).

Apparently in UK and Australia and stuff they're super common.

Not in Australia. We have an abundance of Velodromes (many country towns across the country had one), but never seen one that is grass.

Last week, the NSC Velodrome hosted its final Fixed Gear Classic in a ten-year run of the event. It's the first track race I saw, back in 2009, and I've had the privilege of competing in it the past 3 seasons. A local MPR reporter came out and wrote this nice article (with photos) about the event: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/0...track-last-lap

And I snapped a few portraits of all the riders, which can be seen here: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmFNrVrD

If anyone has memories from attend FGC, I'd love to hear them!

Martin Toft Madsen back at it taking the Danish Hour record back. 53.955km.

Faster than his attempt at Aguascalientes, must be wishing that he hadn't went right after they sanded the track.

They've built a second indoor 250 in Japan, this one at the kern academy. Here's a cool video of the construction:

Where? Chiba?